From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: bug#30820: Chunked store references in compiled code break grafting (again) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 21:59:39 +0100 Message-ID: <87605pf8lg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o9jq7j7r.fsf@gnu.org> <87efkm7eov.fsf@gnu.org> <87in9wxuwo.fsf@gnu.org> <87fu4uibwt.fsf@gnu.org> <87bmfic4pz.fsf@elephly.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58008) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eykq7-0005SL-Uq for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 17:00:08 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eykq3-0000J7-Vd for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 17:00:08 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:38425) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eykq3-0000Iu-Sz for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 17:00:03 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87bmfic4pz.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Wed, 21 Mar 2018 07:39:20 +0100") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 30395-done@debbugs.gnu.org, 30820-done@debbugs.gnu.org Hello, Ricardo Wurmus skribis: >> Good news! Commit e288572710250bcd2aa0f69ce88154d98ac69b29 adjusts >> =E2=80=98gcc-strmov-store-file-names.patch=E2=80=99 in =E2=80=98core-upd= ates=E2=80=99 to correctly deal >> with this case: > [=E2=80=A6] >> I built everything about to =E2=80=98gcc-final=E2=80=99 in =E2=80=98core= -updates=E2=80=99. I checked >> manually that none of the /gnu/store references in libc-2.26.so were >> chunked. > > Wow, thank you so much for fixing this! It turned out to be easier than the first time. ;-) > Is this an option that we can suggest to the GCC developers to > officially support? I don=E2=80=99t know, it=E2=80=99s a Guix-specific hack, and just explainin= g the rationale to GCC people may be tricky: they=E2=80=99ll think we=E2=80=99re = all mad. ;-) Ludo=E2=80=99.